I was reading the Washington Post today and I came across an interesting article. It’s in the ‘A’ section if anyone wants to read it or pick up a copy…and it’s about how the British were handing over a base to the new Iraqi government’s army. It was supposed to be a triumph for US policy, with big brass bands beating drums about the triumphant re-emergence of the military of the government of Iraq. The problem was, it just didn’t happen that way.
The local militia, hostile to US/British forces, moved in to loot the base after the British pulled out …and the Iraqi Army (whom the base had just been handed) were supposed to defend it.
(Quote is from section A of the 08/25 edition of The Washington Post; my access is not shareable by link)
:smack: :smack: :smack:
Yes…the Iraqi Troops…the ones we’ve been spending Billions to train and to do what Bush says. They Mutinied!!! They decided they’d rather fight with the local warlord than defend their democracy. Jay-sus, I haven’t heard stuff like this since I was a kid and the South Vietnamese abandoned their guns and tanks and ran screaming like little girls ahead of the advance of the North Vietnamese regulars. Yes, there’s a corollary there; the one thing in common is the US foreign policy. Still, that was 35 years ago. Have we as a nation learned nothing since then…?
Yes, I pit the Iraqi Army; the one that we paid to train and inspire. But I also pit the people who made all this possible. I pit this war, in all of its stupidity. I pit the politicians sending friends and family over to Iraq to die essentially for nothing. I pit the stupidity of these same politicians for taking failed Vietnam strategies and trying to apply them in the 21st century Iraq, all while on my tax-dollars.
Raise your hands whoever heard that before, this is the first time I heard of this. Most of the reports I see are from the area controlled by the US. The worrisome thing is that this are mostly Shiites, the ones that were supposed to be glad we liberated them.
Looking around, it seems that this is officially a change of tactics from the part of the British. Nothing wrong with that, Og knows a change of tactics was needed even if the sorry leadership does not want to hear about it. But, I am getting the feeling that the stated reason is not quite right.
The lack of intelligence that did not see the lack of control that came is worrisome IMO, All that is leading me to believe that the Shiites, that are considered to be “allies”, are beginning to seed misinformation. Good luck in the marshes.
According to a respectable English newspaper there was no fighting or mutiny, just looting:
A British soldier said that as the last men drove away, they saw pick-up trucks being filled with equipment worth tens of thousands of pounds.
…
The Iraqi and British governments had described the transfer of Camp Smitty on July 30, a base outside the southern city of Samawah, as a key step in handing control of security back to Iraqis.
But the looting casts doubt on official insistence that coalition troops are only withdrawing when local authorities are ready to assume their responsibilities.
…
Muthanna, a sparsely-populated province bordering Saudi Arabia, is considered one of Iraq’s most peaceful.
No, no, no, Count Blucher, one must not draw parallels between Vietnam and Iraq. Must not. Look into my eyes. There are no similarities between Vietnam and Iraq. None. Never ever say this again.
The latest and greatest verson from the Washington Post backs away from the mutiny charge, now saying it was a “rumored” mutiny and that the point of contention was Iraqi forces not wanting to be deployed to Baghdad. Per the article:
That’s the funniest thing, in a sick way, I’ve read all day. I swear I remember seeing a movie where a clueless leader, standing in the middle of a riot, shouts out “I’m in complete control!”
Give that Major a job in the White House Press Office - he’ll fit right in.
